Heaven and a Ho Hum attitude about it by Msgr. Charles Pope


http://blog.adw.org/2013/10/ho-hum-on-heaven-not-only-have-many-lost-a-proper-fear-of-hell-but-also-a-deep-longing-for-heaven/

 

Heaven and a Ho Hum attitude about it

Ho Hum on Heaven? Not only have many lost a proper fear of Hell, but also a deep longing for Heaven. By: Msgr. Charles Pope

Many years ago I was taught that the essence of heaven is the Beatific Vision. That is, one will look upon the glorious and radiant face of God, and find in that look the fulfillment of all desires, and a joy (beatus) beyond all telling.

And surely this description remains both true and worth repeating. However,

I have noticed that some get stuck on the the word “vision” and to some extent on the word “face,” and tend to reduce the experience to a kind of “static” (unchanging) vision.

For our experience of the “face” of another is that it does not change. And we are further taught that God does not change.

And thus, in being asked to consider heaven as a beatific vision (or beholding) of God’s face, some struggle to imagine

what one might do after about twenty minutes, let alone for all eternity. Therefore, people often shift their thinking about heaven to playing golf, being reunited with loved ones, walking streets of gold, and having mansions.

I have quoted Pope Benedict regarding this problem before, but his statement of the problem is worth repeating:

Perhaps many people reject the faith today simply because they do not find the prospect of eternal life attractive….To continue living for ever —endlessly—appears more like a curse than a gift….to live always, without end—this, all things considered, can only be monotonous and ultimately unbearable…. The term “eternal life” is intended to give a name to this known “unknown”. Inevitably it is an inadequate term that creates confusion. “Eternal”, in fact, suggests to us the idea of something interminable, and this frightens us; “life” makes us think of the life that we know…[which] very often it brings more toil than satisfaction, so that while on the one hand we desire it, on the other hand we do not want it

. (Spe Salvi, 10, 12).

So, a lot of our terminology, though biblical and correct, is lost to modern ears

and the modern imagination. It needs greater explanation, even among believers who are often very vague about the contours and promises of heaven.

I have articulated before that somehow we must communicate that the “eternal” in “eternal life” is not a reference only to the length of life, but to the fulness of life

. To be in heaven is not merely to live forever, but to be fully and gloriously alive in a manner which we can barely even imagine now. It is to have all our gifts, and every aspect of who we are, gloriously perfected, with a God-like glory.

St. Ireneus says

that the Glory of God is man fully alive. The Lord told St. Catherine of Siena that if she were ever to see a soul glorified in heaven, “You would fall down and worship because you would think you were looking at me.”

This is our glory and this is our dignity

, to one day have a God like perfection and glory, and to become fully alive in an unimaginable and powerful way.

And as for our “vision” of God. We ought not think of it as

some sort of static vision, as if we were looking at a picture or face that never changes.

Rather, because God is infinite our grasp of his glory with be inexhaustible.

Thus, all eternity will never be enough for us to comprehend him. From moment to moment, one new and greater glory after another will be reveled. He will be our one desire, and our hearts will never tire of God and God alone.

St. Bernard of Clairvaux speaks to this in one of his sermons.

He meditates on what will happen to us when we finally see Him whom our soul has longed for:

Nor, I think, will a soul cease to seek him even when it has found him. … when the soul happily finds Him, its desire is not quenched but kindled…Rather it is oil poured upon the flames….Joy will be fulfilled, but there will be no end to desire, and therefore no end to the search.

(Sermon 84.1 on the Song of Songs)

Yes! Heaven will not be a static vision at all.

It will be truly a beatific (happy) vision, but it will be anything but “static.” There will be Joy, after joy, glory upon glory, for all eternity. And each fulfilled desire will kindle a deeper desire as our hearts grow deeper and wider with love.

Do most Christians know of this understanding? Probably not.

Frankly most of us are too vague about heaven and seldom meditate upon it.

Sadly, to be vague about the reward, tends to kill any effort to strive for it.

And thus we face today, not only a lack of reverential fear of Hell (which we have well discussed here), but also a lack of zeal to seek God and Heaven.

It is a “perfect storm” which which explains a lot

of spiritual tepidity today and the lack of evangelical zeal that has plagued the Church for at least the last 100 years.

We need to be a lot clearer

about death, judgment, Heaven and Hell and also realize that our descriptions especially about heaven, often fail to communicate its vision let alone inspire others to seek it, whatever the cost.

To that end, I offer this little reflection and invite your own comments and reflections

Advertisements

From the ‘Radical Life” site DON”T GET TO COMFORTABLE


Don’t get too comfortable

 

“If you look for truth, you may find comfort in the end; if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin, and in the end, despair.” – C. S. Lewis

If I look for truth, I may find comfort – but I may not. Life is not about being comfortable. It’s about pressing forward out of my comfort zone. It’s about getting up everyday and accepting whatever challenge I am faced with, staying faithful to the truth and searching for the meaning and value in the suffering I endure.

The Christian life is not the secret to success, but the shortcut to sainthood. It is not here to cure your pain so much as to keep you from wasting it.

We are obsessed with getting rid of pain. That’s often a good thing, but it’s not the most important thing. What’s more important is the soul that is forged in the fire of that pain. In this fire, we discover the truth about who we are.

We are reminded that we are small and weak and in need of help. That we have limits and are in need of a Limitless One. This is the truth. Too much comfort puts us in danger of forgetting it.

You weren’t made for this world, so don’t get too comfortable.

QUOTED FROM

https://snt147.mail.live.com/default.aspx?id=64855#n=2038851595&fid=1&mid=14b052c1-41ae-11e3-9934-00215ad71a08&fv=1

a Call to Holiness by Cardinal Doaln


 

Called to be holy: Cardinal Dolan’s 10-step guide to holiness

 

By Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan
An edited excerpt from then Archbishop Dolan’s “Called to Be Holy”

“Here is the key to our spiritual growth: a faithful, personal, loving relationship with Jesus. To know Jesus, to hear Jesus, to love Jesus, to trust Jesus, to obey Jesus, to share his life in the deepest fiber of our being, and then to serve him — this is our goal.

How do we grow in holiness? How? That, of course, is our spiritual program, isn’t it, the stewardship of the spirit, “the regimen of the soul bringing about the reign of God,” to quote servant of the poor Charles de Foucauld. I propose to you a spiritual regimen, a stewardship of the spirit coming not from me, but from centuries of practice and learning.

1. Daily Prayer

Patient, persevering, persistent prayer, every day, is number one. Here I am not speaking of the Mass — such as the Eucharist — but of silent, personal, private prayer, a daily period of quiet communion with the Lord, conscious of his presence, accepting of his love, and returning it with praise, petition, and thanksgiving.

2. Daily Mass

From this daily Eucharistic meal will come, for all celebrate the Eucharist as the essential moment in their day, a reverential awe for the Real Presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament, and a desire to spend time before him there in visits and prayer.

3. Daily Fidelity to the Liturgy of the Hours
This ancient prayer of the Church is mostly associated with those in Holy Orders. It is also intended to be the prayer of the laity, who “are encouraged to recite the divine office, either with the priests, or among themselves, or even individually” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 1175).

4. Daily Spiritual Reading

Lectio divina, daily reverent meditation upon Sacred Scripture, is first and foremost, of course, but I also speak of daily spiritual reading of the enduring books of our Catholic tradition, as well as interest in the burgeoning contemporary literature on the interior life. Nor should we forget attention to the documents of the magisterium, the words of our Holy Father, the documents of the Apostolic See, the messages and pastorals of our own bishops, all vehicles of the Holy Spirit for fostering our growth in sanctity.

5. Spiritual Direction
An honest, trusting, fruitful, consistent relationship with a spiritual director is, in some ways, the linchpin of all the rest, for this is where integration and interiorization begin to take place. The danger we all face is a life of formalism, where we passively do things just to get by, not allowing the values of formation to sink in and become part of us. Spiritual direction can promote this interiorization, this integration.

6. The Sacrament of Penance

Regular reliance upon the mercy of God abundant in the Sacrament of Penance should be a priority in our lives. While how often you approach this sacrament is a good topic to discuss with your spiritual director, at least once a month seems a solid tradition of the Church. That you approach confession regularly is a hallmark of sound spiritual stewardship. And, a practical help to make our regular confessions more fruitful would be a daily examination of conscience, praising God for our growth, asking for healing of the faults we admit.

7. Growing in Virtue

A tireless effort for growth in virtue and turning away from sin should be the pattern of our daily lives. Obedience to the constant refrain of the Gospels, we are always in the process of conversion, repentance, dying to sin, self, and Satan, rising to new life in Christ. This is the “paschal mystery.” In practice, this means growth in virtue and struggle with sin. Development in particular virtues is most appropriate: faith, hope, charity, simplicity of life, chastity, obedience and integrity.

8. Devotion to the Blessed Mother sand the Saints
Our devotion to them is a sustaining dependence upon the “Communion of Saints,” an awareness that we are members of a supernatural family not confined to the here and now, that we have the saints as examples and helpers, pre-eminently, especially our Blessed Mother. Thus, a wholesome devotion to her would be an essential part of our spiritual regimen.

9. Holistic Formation, Allowing Spirituality to Permeate Our Lives

The spiritual life is not a tidy, isolated compartment of our existence! No, as the Pope John Paul II said, “Spiritual formation is the core which unifies and gives life to our entire being.” Thus, every element of our lives is part of the spiritual arena, and growth in holiness will entail wholehearted immersion in a spiritual regimen.

10. The Final Component: Keeping Ever in View the Call to Holiness
Our goal is nothing less than a reordering of life through the sacraments, which will configure us in an irrevocable, radical way to Christ. That we may be good, holy, happy, healthy, learned, zealous, selfless, committed faithful is the goal of our spiritual growth.

I have two notes of caution, however. First, growth in holiness is not our accomplishment, but a pure gift from God. The Lord does it, not me! These 10 steps of spiritual stewardship I just went through are not cozy little acts we perform to produce holiness — they are simply tried-and-true ways we open up in humility to let the Lord in to do his work in, on, for, and, often, in spite of us!

Second, to use the words of Sister Bridge McKenna, “The road inward to spiritual growth always results in a U-turn outward in love for others.” Our stewardship of the Spirit is never a soothing benefice we cling to, but an inspiration to love humankind better. The Jesus who calls us to spiritual ecstasy on Mt. Tabor likewise invites us to the pouring out of self on Mt. Calvary.”

Cardinal Dolan is the archbishop of New York and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).

 

 

Abortion, Contraception and the Church Fathers


http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/abortion-contraception-and-the-church-fathers#ixzz1mkLKIK6r

Abortion, Contraception and the Church Fathers (21162)

Despite what some commentators and politicians think, Church teaching on abortion and contraception has remained unchanged

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/abortion-contraception-and-the-church-fathers#ixzz2iYcszH3e

“The recent indignity by which the Obama administration wants to mandate everyone, including all Catholic institutions or their insurers, to pay for contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs, has raised the issue of Catholic teaching on these issues.

Some commentators have mistakenly asserted that the Catholic ban on these practices only goes back to Humanae Vitae (On the Regulation of Birth), by Pope Paul VI in 1968, or as far back as Casti Connubii (Of Chaste Wedlock), by Pope Pius XI in 1931.

The latter encyclical was written in response to the change of moral doctrine by the Anglican Church, which undermined centuries of Protestant condemnation of contraception by permitting it at the Aug. 15, 1930 Lambeth Conference.

Paul VI wrote Humanae Vitae in response to the then newly invented birth control pill, rejecting it as a legitimate means of contraception for Catholics. However, these encyclicals, along with the 20th century’s nearly 100 other Vatican statements condemning artificial birth control, were simply restating the continuous history of moral theology on this topic.

Catholics do well to know this history of moral teaching on contraception and abortion to back up our position against the mandate, as well as to know better how to live the Catholic faith. Therefore, we will present some of the texts from the patristic (early Christian) sources to demonstrate how early was the Christian rejection of these practices, known widely in the Greco-Roman world.

The earliest reference to contraception and abortion is in the Didache, a document from the second half of the first century or early second century. Didache reads: “You shall not practice birth control, you shall not murder a child by abortion, nor kill what is begotten” (2).

Many translations read “practice sorcery” because the Greek word sometimes has that meaning (see Wisdom 12:4, Galatians 5:20, Revelation 18:23). However, it also means practice medicine or use poison, and the term may refer to contraceptive measures, as is the case in a number of the following texts.

Another early text is the Epistle of Barnabas: “You shall not slay the child by procuring abortion, nor shall you destroy it after it is born” (19). This also shows that the earliest Christians forbade abortion.

In the second century, St. Clement of Alexandria wrote in the Paedagogus (2.10.96): “Women who resort to some sort of deadly abortion drug kill not only the embryo, but along with it, all human kindness.” This passage supports our translation of the Didache by mentioning the use of drugs to induce abortion.

In 177, Athenagoras of Athens wrote in the Supplication for the Christians: “And when we say that those women who use drugs to bring on abortion commit murder, and will have to give an account to God for the abortion, on what principle should we commit murder?”

This is the first of many patristic texts identifying abortion with murder, thereby indicating a high value to the personhood of the fetus. Tertullian’s Apology in 197, while he was still in union with the Church, says, “In our case, murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to the birth.”

Tertullian was himself a married man and understood the dignity of the fetus in the womb.

In the third century, Minucius Felix (226) wrote in Octavius: “There are some women who, by drinking medical preparations, extinguish the source of the future man in their very bowels, and thus commit a parricide before they bring forth” (30).

Around 228, St. Hippolytus wrote about unmarried women, including some reputed to be Christians, who became pregnant from illicit relationships. In his Refutation of All Heresies, he says, “Whence women, reputed believers, began to resort to drugs for producing sterility and to gird themselves round, so to expel what was being conceived on account of their not wishing to have a child either by a slave or by any paltry fellow, for the sake of their family and excessive wealth. Behold, into how great impiety that lawless one has proceeded by inculcating adultery and murder at the same time! And withal, after such audacious acts, they, lost to all shame, attempt to call themselves a Catholic Church” (9.7).

He considers their behavior an effectual refutation of their status as Christians. A document known as the Constitutions of the Holy Apostles reads “You shall not slay thy child by causing abortion, nor kill that which is begotten; for ‘everything that is shaped and has received a soul from God, if it be slain, shall be avenged, as being unjustly destroyed’” (7.1).

This states the belief that the fetus has a soul and its life must be protected from conception forward.

In the fourth century, the Latin and Greek authors addressed these issues. St. Augustine wrote On Marriage and Concupiscence (419). Though he was already the bishop of Hippo when he wrote it, he is equally famous for having lived with a concubine for 14 years and had a son with her. Therefore, he had an experience of living in a sort of family and he learned from his mistakes. He wrote: “I am supposing, then, although you are not lying [with your wife] for the sake of procreating offspring, you are not for the sake of lust obstructing their procreation by an evil prayer or an evil deed. Those who do this, although they are called husband and wife, are not; nor do they retain any reality of marriage, but with a respectable name cover a shame” (1.15.17).

St. Basil the Great

wrote in his First Canonical Letter, Canon 2: “The woman who purposely destroys her unborn child is guilty of murder. With us there is no nice enquiry as to its being formed or unformed. In this case it is not only the being about to be born who is vindicated, but the woman in her attack upon herself; because in most cases women who make such attempts die. The destruction of the embryo is an additional crime, a second murder, at all events, if we regard it as done with intent” (374).

The reason he mentioned the “nice enquiry as to its being formed or unformed” is that some theologians thought that the rational soul did not develop in the fetus until the third month or even later. St. Basil simply notes that this is not an issue because at any stage the destruction of the embryo is a “crime” and a “murder.” Pace Nancy Pelosi, who had claimed that since St. Augustine had thought that the rational soul began late in the pregnancy, therefore abortion would be acceptable in the early stages. St. Basil shows that such false reasoning was unfounded.

St. Jerome

, Letter 22 to Eustochium (396), said: “Some, when they find themselves with child through their sin, use drugs to procure abortion, and when (as often happens) they die with their offspring, they enter the lower world, laden with the guilt not only of adultery against Christ, but also of suicide and child murder. Yet it is these who say: ‘Unto the pure all things are pure; my conscience is sufficient guide for me.’ A pure heart is what God looks for” (13).

Here St. Jerome denies that the conscience of the abortion is a sufficient guide. As will be clarified in later centuries, the conscience must be correctly formed so that the Lord can truly find a pure heart in the individual.

Not only did many of the great theologians address abortion and contraception, but so did some councils. The Council of Elvira in Spain (305) decreed two canons forbidding the sacraments to women who committed abortion: “If a woman becomes pregnant by committing adultery, while her husband is absent, and after the act she destroys (the child), it is proper to keep her from Communion until death, because she has doubled her crime” (63). Canon 68 reads: “If a catechumen should conceive by an adulterer, and should procure the death of the child, she can be baptized only at the end of her life.”

A similar decision was reached at the Council of Ancyra (314): “Concerning women who commit fornication, and destroy that which they have conceived, or who are employed in making drugs for abortion, a former decree excluded them [from Communion] until the hour of death” (29)

None of the Fathers or councils offer contradictory opinions on contraception or abortion. Popes Pius XI, Paul VI and Blessed John Paul II were simply presenting the teaching of the Church in the same line of thought that began in the earliest generations, continued through the Middle Ages, and was taught by the Protestant reformers. (Martin Luther called people who use contraception “logs,” “stock” and “swine.” John Calvin said contraception was “condemned and “doubly monstrous,” while abortion was “a crime incapable of expiation.”)

The popes have called the Church to a moral and holy approach to marriage and the conception of children. We form our conscience in the light of this constant tradition, and we teach and live it by the graces God gives us.

On this basis we insist that the government allow us complete freedom to practice our religion and its precepts.”

Jesuit Father Mitch Pacwa is the host of

EWTN Live and Threshold of Hope on EWTN. He is president of Ignatius Productions.

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/abortion-contraception-and-the-church-fathers#ixzz2iYcKdaaZ

Which are The GREATEST Sacraments?


      

 

Which are the GREATEST Sacraments?

By Patrick Miron

Right away I need to point out the glaring ERROR in the heading. Because God who is “Good and Perfectly Good” is the “author”; the initiator ; and the owner of all Seven Sacraments; so each, in its own way; like God Himself is “Perfectly Good.”

BAPTISM: Is required by God for entry into heaven John 3:5; Mt.28: 18-19

Confession / Reconciliation/ Penance: Is the Only & normal way God forgives Mortal sins; also necessary for ones salvation.

1 John 1:8-10; 1 John 5: 16-17 & John 20:19-23

Eucharist /Holy Communion: is Christ himself and permits one to become more Christ-Like

John Chapter 6: notably verses 40-57

Confirmation: Invites the Holy Spirit into our hearts, minds and souls, as long as we are in  “the state of God’s grace.”

John 14:16; Acts 2:4; Acts 8:14-17; Acts 19:3-6; Heb. 6:2

Matrimony: Sanctifies marriage; strengthens it, blesses it and makes it POSSIBLE to endure its many challenges.

Matthew 5: 30-32;  Mt. 19:10-11; Eph. 5:31-32

Holy Orders: The gift of the Catholic priesthood from which flows Bishops, Popes, Vowed Religious and Deacons. Sustaining, growing and maintaining Christ One True Church. Acts 6:3-6; Acts 13:2-3; 1 Tim. 3:1; 1 Tim. 3:8-9; 1 Tim. 4:14; 1 Tim. 4:16; 1 Tim. 5:17-19; 1 Tim. 5:22.

Anointing of the Sick.Anointing prepares the person for death, and only incidentally may produce physical healing. The salvation and resurrection spoken of in James are in the first place spiritual. James 5:14-15.  

http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/sacraments_in_scripture.htm

Almighty and Perfectly Good God is the giver of EACH of these gifts; these unique sources of God’s grace; which unlike all other forms of Grace; man himself beckons, request and to a very Substanually degree; controls the flow of and the amounts of grace received through them.

This is especially true of the NORMAL-use gifts of the Sacraments of Confession and the Eucharist, which can be had on a very frequent basis; unlike the other Sacraments which are limited in there NORMAL acceptance

[usually just one time*]. Thus these TWO Sacraments, while not “greater”; Can and SHOULD be the source of GREATER-GRACE by virtue of the number of times they can be received. And that my friends is exactly WHY God Created them.

* Marriage and Anointing the sick can conditionally be received more than ONCE too.

God Created the sacraments to enhance the possibility of Our salvation. SEEK THE LORD where he CAN be found. Amen!

 

“72” where sent: WHY?


                “

 

72” Were sent out in Christ name

    Why “72”? And WHY are numbers in the bible signifient?

by: Patrick Miron

Luke 10: 1-5 “And after these things the Lord appointed also other seventy-two: and he sent them two and two before his face into every city and place whither he himself was to come. And he said to them: The harvest indeed is great, but the labourers are few. Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he send labourers into his harvest. Go: Behold I send you as lambs among wolves. Carry neither purse, nor scrip, nor shoes; and salute no man by the way. Into whatsoever house you enter, first say: Peace be to this house.”

Anytime one encounters a number in the bible, it’s important to ask if the number itself has significance. This is based on Jewish Tradition where numbers often have a meaning of there own, known by all, and understood by all for who the teaching or message is immediately intended for.

www.agapebiblestudy.com

“In sacred Scripture numbers usually have more significance than their quantitative indicators. More often than not, even when a number is used to indicate a certain quantity, the individual number given may point beyond the numerical value to a symbolic significance. At other times the number given is not to be taken literally and may represent an approximate value, a symbolic value, or may represent hyperbole-an exaggerated value. For example, the six day period of Creation may not be literal but may represent a symbolic period of time that was perfected on the seventh day when God rested-7 being one of the four “perfect” numbers. Or the number of the 144,000 heavenly souls marked with the “seal of the living God” in Revelation chapter 7 may suggest, as Bible scholars both ancient and modern have interpreted it, a number reflecting the symbolic perfection of redeemed man in terms of the “perfect” number 12 which signifies perfection of government in Scripture. 144,000 is the square of 12.”

http://www.agapebiblestudy.com/documents/the%20significance%20of%20numbers%20in%20scripture.htm: Much additional information can be found on this web site.

ONE: In sacred Scripture “one,” ehad, in Hebrew, represents unity and is the quintessential number of monotheism, the worship of one God.

TWO: This number can mean difference, division or double portion.

THREE: In sacred Scripture the number three represents that which is solid, real, substantial, and something in its completeness. This number usually indicates something of importance or significance in God’s plan of salvation by identifying an important event in Salvation History. This number operates as a “sign-post” in Scripture study for the reader to “pay attention” to the significance of the next event.

FOUR: The number four represents God’s creative works, especially works associated with the earth:

FIVE: This is the number of power and Divine grace.

SIX: Both man and the serpent were created on the sixth day, therefore, the number six represents both man and rebellion.

In the Greek alphabet the number six is not represented by an alphabetic letter but is instead represented by a symbol called the “stigma.” In Revelation 13:18 the number of the Beast is written not as 666 but is instead is written with the Greek symbols for 600 and 60 and 6. In his book Numbers in Scripture, E.W. Bullinger observes that these three symbols correspond to first and last letters of the Greek word for Christ = CHRISTOS, with the symbol of the serpent in between the two other numbers of 666 [see Numbers in Scripture page 49]. Perhaps this arrangement can be seen to be Christ the Messiah crushing the serpent as God told the serpent in Genesis 3:15: I shall put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he will crush your head and you will strike its heel.

SEVEN:Spiritual perfection and fullness or completion . It is the number of Covenant and of the Holy Spirit.

EIGHT: sh’moneh in Hebrew, from the root shah’meyn “to make fat” or “to cover with fat” which means to super-abound. The first of a new series: there are seven days in a week; the 8th day is the beginning of a new series of days. It is the number of salvation, resurrection, and new birth/regeneration.

NINE: This number is related to the number six, being the sum of its factors (3×3=9, and 3+3=6). It is significant of the end of man and the sum of all man’s works. Nine is therefore the number of finality or judgment.

TEN:Perfection of divine order

ELEVEN:disorder: 10 + 1 or 12 – 1; also disorganization, lack of fulfillment, imperfection

TWELVE: Perfection of government. Twelve is the number of the Church, both the Old Covenant Church of Israel founded by twelve physical fathers (the twelve sons of Jacob-Israel) and the New Covenant Church founded by twelve spiritual fathers (the twelve Apostles). This number also has a relationship with multiples of twelve END QUOTES

So dear friends we can now understand the core message in the choice of using “72.” It does NOT necessarily means that Christ ACTUALLY chose “72” additional disciples, even though it might have been?

Here “72” represents [6x 12] = “72.”

The “6” here represents both man, and mans natural tendency to rebel again change and authority. While the “12” represents both the responsibility and the necessary POWER of independent-“GOVERNANCE.”

The message then becomes that man [all mankind] is commanded by God, to “go forth and preach the [His] GOOD NEWS”; but the 6 x 12 lacks perfection and or competition, that the number “84” [7 x 12] would lend to the teaching. So the entirety of the message then is that this mandate becomes an ON-GOING; NEVER-ENDING task for humanity. It applied when Christ was here on earth, and it applies [perhaps even more urgently] to us today; to [1] Know the Good News; [2] to Live the Good News and to [3] SHARE the Good news as God grants us the opportunity to do so.

The “real-kicker” though is that the ability to KNOW the fullness of God’s “Good News“, and therefore the ability to share it [we can’t share what we ourselves do not have] resides exclusively within the confines of the Catholic Church.

Mt. 15:18-19 “And I say to thee : That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.”

Jn. 17:18-19 “As thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world . And for them do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth”

Jn.20:21-22 “He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost.

Mk. 16:14-15 “At length he appeared to the eleven as they were at table: and he upbraided them with their incredulity and hardness of heart, because they did not believe them who had seen him after he was risen again. And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Mt. 28: 16-20 “And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.”

And NOW dear friends, you know! Amen!

 


 

Whose side is God [god] on?

by: Patrick Miron

I suspect that a most common response might be: “mine” or “ours.”

Each faith and every group holds to their claim on God – god as “their own.”  Few if any groups or sects seem willing to share their possession of “their God – gods” with other faiths or sets of beliefs; by which I mean to say: are willing to freely extend ownership to others of the very same God – gods they hold as their primary God -gods with other, holding onto differing belief-systems. [yes, I do understand a willingness to share so long as they  accept MY beliefs].

And yes; everyone; even atheist and agnostics have their “own gods“. Pride, Lust, Greed, Wealth and Power, along with Sexuality, & Pornography are in there own way “gods” to a great many people. As ones’ God-god’s tend to influence who and what we are; who and what we choose to be, and have a huge influence, even if not holding outright control of our thoughts and actions. I hold that this fact is undeniable.

Even within the realm of “christianity” there seems to be [must be?] multiple God’s. This is provable by the thousands of differing sets  of “christian”  faith -beliefs. Yet truth is singular, so either there is just “One True” God, with His One set of True Faith beliefs; or Christianities God is just “another god” among many other man-made; man chosen gods?

How can one know this?

Because even simple logic ought to lead everyone to know and understand, and conclude that each “God” or [god]” must have it’s own set of beliefs. Can any God [god] hold differing views [often even contradictory] on the same defined issue? No; this is simply an impossibility. Except of course for the New Ager’s”  who’s common claim is “it’s only TRUE if I say it’s true.” Still, Simple Logic denies this philosophy of self-interest being the only right judge, and  holds that [any]  “One God – god” can and does hold only One view per defined issue as being the “truth of that defined issue;” because truth itself is and must always be  only singular. Saying otherwise; even choosing otherwise, cannot and does not alter this reality.

So, “whose side is God-god” on?

God is on God’s gods side. It can’t be any other way.

What does this do to YOUR understanding of “your God-god?”  being “The True God?”

Malachi 2:10 “Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why then doth every one of us despise his brother, violating the covenant of our fathers?

Mark 12:29 “And Jesus answered him: The first commandment of all is, Hear, O Israel: the Lord thy God is one God.”